Any points update

Old Sep 15th 2004, 11:02 am
  #16  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 265
bartM will become famous soon enough
Default Re: Any points update

Seriously, for a lawyer you seem to have a very black-and-white way of looking at things. No one demands CIC to put a fine print after each statement but pass mark is one FUNDAMENTAL criterion that most of the prospective applicants look at in the beginning (that's why CIC put self- assessment tool on the web for Christ's sake). Coming back to my example with APR, this is also one FUNDAMENTAL parameter that has to be explained without a shadow of doubt, that's why creditors must be so careful about explaining it and can leave other stuff in the fine print.

So why does CIC do nothing about explaining the floating pass mark parameter in a clear way if it can cause it a lot of problems for people being rejected, longer processing periods, possible legal challenges? Please explain the rationale of it to me, because I just don't get it.


Originally Posted by Andrew Miller
No, I understand you correctly - if we would follow your suggestion then CIC should put fine print after almost every statement they make on their website. Instead they always state that info provided on their website and in the application kits is for basic information only and for details you should refer to proper laws and Regulations. As for the pass mark - if you go to "Immigrate as Skilled Worker" page there is a small window in the right corner below the title and there is a link to pass mark:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/skilled...-passmark.html

If you read the Notice you'll see that "The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada may amend the pass mark from time to time."

This simple notice should alert you and prompt you to check with relevant law and Regulations. Taking this action would lead you to section 77 of Regulations:

http://www.canlii.org/ca/regu/sor2-227/sec77.html

There are many more (other than pass mark) factors that may be misinterpreted by applicants who simply follow only application kits and CIC website without checking with ever changing Regulations and Operational Memoranda. It is impossible for CIC to keep tab on all those factors and provide fine print on every page for those who don't want to follow the basic advice to read the law.
bartM is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 11:30 am
  #17  
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 8,984
Andrew Miller is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Any points update

First of all - I am immigration consultant, I don't practice as a lawyer.

Secondly - no matter what you may think it is applicant's responsibility (and best interest) to learn the law he or she applies under. What CIC is doing by providing clear links to law and Regs as well as online access to Manual and Memoranda is already well beyond generosity and they have absolutely no obligation to provide more. If you can't follow the links and/or have problems (quite naturally) interpreting the law then you should ask those who know the law and can interpret it for you - CIC is also following the law, they didn't make the law.

It is like you are going to the foreign country and for example renting a car - is it rental agency or even this country government's responsibility to print on your rental aggreement what are the traffic laws in that country? Not, it is your responsoibility to obey the law and your responsibility to learn it first so you don't later complain that you didn't know. Again - ignorance of the law is not an excuse nor basis for complaints later.



Originally Posted by bartM
Seriously, for a lawyer you seem to have a very black-and-white way of looking at things. No one demands CIC to put a fine print after each statement but pass mark is one FUNDAMENTAL criterion that most of the prospective applicants look at in the beginning (that's why CIC put self- assessment tool on the web for Christ's sake). Coming back to my example with APR, this is also one FUNDAMENTAL parameter that has to be explained without a shadow of doubt, that's why creditors must be so careful about explaining it and can leave other stuff in the fine print.

So why does CIC do nothing about explaining the floating pass mark parameter in a clear way if it can cause it a lot of problems for people being rejected, longer processing periods, possible legal challenges? Please explain the rationale of it to me, because I just don't get it.
Andrew Miller is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 11:32 am
  #18  
Glasgow Rangers
Thread Starter
 
Voyager970's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 1,548
Voyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond reputeVoyager970 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Any points update

bartM
I totally agree with you that Mr Miller seems to be very blinkered and does see things in a very black and white way, with regards this thread.
I can also see where Mr Miller is coming from, there are strict rules and regulations concerning the process of emmigration, and these must be strictly adhered to, BUT I hasten to add,

How does the Canadian Govt see itself as a responsible govt, in terms of the emmigrtaion process, when it can decide to lower or raise the pass mark at any time, influencing many thousands of applications either in favour of, or against obtaining PR status.
If this was to happen in Britian this would be deemed as direct discrimination in favour of the applicant. Does Canada not have discrimination laws !!!!

The applicant can claim discrimination in that they were unfairly treated in the application process, by the Canadian govt increasing the pass mark whilst there application was pending, and they also lost all their money, that would be deemed to be a fraudulant act.

Whilst I agree that Canada does not abide by any British laws, surely Canada must have the same or similair laws, if not be interpreted differently.


MMMMMM Me thinks this one may drag on for a bit !!!!!!!

Eddie
Voyager970 is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 11:52 am
  #19  
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 8,984
Andrew Miller is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Any points update

No matter what we will argue about here it won't change the fact that the law is the law. Many argued in this forum in the past about same topic that changes to pass mark should only be applied retroactively if they benefit applicants but not if they are limiting number of qualified applicants.

Valid reason - but only it the law would be designed and intended to protect interest of immigrants. But it is not - immigration law is designed and intended to serve interest of Canada and Canadian economy, thus Canada is the intended beneficiary of the law here, not the applicant. Any change to pass mark is and will be for one reason only - to benefit Canada and best interest of Canadian immigration program, not the immigrants.

Maybe harsh, but this is how it is. Our immigration law is here to serve and protect Canada, Canadians and Canadian economy, not to serve immigrants.

Once everyone understands how and why it is then it will be less misunderstandings.

Immigration is not the right - it is a priviledge and host country has all the rights to set the law the way it seems fit. IRPA is the law approved by Canadian Parliament after several years in the working, it is for sure not perfect (far from it as a matter of fact) and it is here to serve Canada, not immigrants.

I'm sorry for being harsh, I have no intention to offend anyone, but looks like some here needed a reality check.

And finally - I am also trying all I can to have CIC implement lock-in date for pass mark, as it would be only fair way to deal with it.

I'm with you guys, not against. And this is why I think I should tell you how it is, so you know what to expect and how to deal with it - and I won't be the one sugar coating everything (those who follow my contribution here for many years know it already) like some other practitioners do just to improve their cashflow.


Originally Posted by Voyager970
bartM
I totally agree with you that Mr Miller seems to be very blinkered and does see things in a very black and white way, with regards this thread.
I can also see where Mr Miller is coming from, there are strict rules and regulations concerning the process of emmigration, and these must be strictly adhered to, BUT I hasten to add,

How does the Canadian Govt see itself as a responsible govt, in terms of the emmigrtaion process, when it can decide to lower or raise the pass mark at any time, influencing many thousands of applications either in favour of, or against obtaining PR status.
If this was to happen in Britian this would be deemed as direct discrimination in favour of the applicant. Does Canada not have discrimination laws !!!!

The applicant can claim discrimination in that they were unfairly treated in the application process, by the Canadian govt increasing the pass mark whilst there application was pending, and they also lost all their money, that would be deemed to be a fraudulant act.

Whilst I agree that Canada does not abide by any British laws, surely Canada must have the same or similair laws, if not be interpreted differently.


MMMMMM Me thinks this one may drag on for a bit !!!!!!!

Eddie
Andrew Miller is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 11:53 am
  #20  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 265
bartM will become famous soon enough
Default Re: Any points update

Ok, here it comes: "If you can't follow the links and/or have problems (quite naturally) interpreting the law then you should ask those who know the law and can interpret it for you" - let me guess, a paid immigration consultant ?

Don't get me wrong, Andrew, I really appreciate your free professional advice on this forum and I have a lot of respect for you for what you're doing to help people. However, you are simply defending something which is legal but unethical. This kind of thing puts bread on your table and I cannot blame you, but surely deep down inside you must realize that CIC should make an effort to explain this FUNDAMENTAL issue better.

Your argument about traffic laws is flawed - recently I returned from Oz and it was written all over my AVIS car to drive on the left side. One FUNDAMENTAL issue well clarified but turning left on red left in the small print. Get it ?


Originally Posted by Andrew Miller
First of all - I am immigration consultant, I don't practice as a lawyer.

Secondly - no matter what you may think it is applicant's responsibility (and best interest) to learn the law he or she applies under. What CIC is doing by providing clear links to law and Regs as well as online access to Manual and Memoranda is already well beyond generosity and they have absolutely no obligation to provide more. If you can't follow the links and/or have problems (quite naturally) interpreting the law then you should ask those who know the law and can interpret it for you - CIC is also following the law, they didn't make the law.

It is like you are going to the foreign country and for example renting a car - is it rental agency or even this country government's responsibility to print on your rental aggreement what are the traffic laws in that country? Not, it is your responsoibility to obey the law and your responsibility to learn it first so you don't later complain that you didn't know. Again - ignorance of the law is not an excuse nor basis for complaints later.
bartM is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 12:03 pm
  #21  
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 8,984
Andrew Miller is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Any points update

You obviously are one of those who are against paying for advice and for getting it for free only. It is of course your free choice to make. And you clearly indicated your bias against immigration consultants too.

Learn the basic rule - you only get what you pay for in this world. Like with any other law in every other country - there is the law, thare are all who must obey it and there are those who have knowledge, experience and approved credentials to help you with it. And yes - you pay for such help, just like you pay your car mechanic, plumber, golf or ski instructor, life coach, etc. . If you don't want to pay then you are on your own and must learn the law and it's interpretation by yourself and face consequences of not getting it right.

Get it?


Originally Posted by bartM
Ok, here it comes: "If you can't follow the links and/or have problems (quite naturally) interpreting the law then you should ask those who know the law and can interpret it for you" - let me guess, a paid immigration consultant ?

Don't get me wrong, Andrew, I really appreciate your free professional advice on this forum and I have a lot of respect for you for what you're doing to help people. However, you are simply defending something which is legal but unethical. This kind of thing puts bread on your table and I cannot blame you, but surely deep down inside you must realize that CIC should make an effort to explain this FUNDAMENTAL issue better.

Your argument about traffic laws is flawed - recently I returned from Oz and it was written all over my AVIS car to drive on the left side. One FUNDAMENTAL issue well clarified but turning left on red left in the small print. Get it ?
Andrew Miller is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 12:08 pm
  #22  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 265
bartM will become famous soon enough
Default Re: Any points update

Eddie,

Well, I agree with Andrew about immigration being a privilege and Canada being free to set the laws in any way. If they set pass mark to 99, I would not complain, just move to the US, possibly. I also have NO problem with floating pass mark. Hey, if the CIC people get millions of applicants with 67, of course they have to up the ante to filter out people that will benefit Canada the most. NO ONE can complain about this.

What I object to is the way that people are mislead about this issue, all according to the law. If CIC clearly stated that: "Note, that your final assessment may be done against significantly higher pass mark!", one bloody line of HTML code, who could argue with it ? It would make people more aware, cut off a bunch of dishonest shysters, save a lot of time and money for everyone.

Me, I'm not influenced that much, unless they change it to like 80. I can always return to Sweden or move to the US. But all these poor guys that have nowhere to go and, disinformed, have to save for years for a lawyer, application etc. That's simply wrong.


Originally Posted by Voyager970
bartM
I totally agree with you that Mr Miller seems to be very blinkered and does see things in a very black and white way, with regards this thread.
I can also see where Mr Miller is coming from, there are strict rules and regulations concerning the process of emmigration, and these must be strictly adhered to, BUT I hasten to add,

How does the Canadian Govt see itself as a responsible govt, in terms of the emmigrtaion process, when it can decide to lower or raise the pass mark at any time, influencing many thousands of applications either in favour of, or against obtaining PR status.
If this was to happen in Britian this would be deemed as direct discrimination in favour of the applicant. Does Canada not have discrimination laws !!!!

The applicant can claim discrimination in that they were unfairly treated in the application process, by the Canadian govt increasing the pass mark whilst there application was pending, and they also lost all their money, that would be deemed to be a fraudulant act.

Whilst I agree that Canada does not abide by any British laws, surely Canada must have the same or similair laws, if not be interpreted differently.


MMMMMM Me thinks this one may drag on for a bit !!!!!!!

Eddie
bartM is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 12:23 pm
  #23  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 265
bartM will become famous soon enough
Default Re: Any points update

Andrew, you misinterpreted what I wrote. I have no bias against immigration consultants or any lawyers or specialists in particular. I pay for advice whenever it is needed and I would definitely hire you if I had problems with immigration to Canada. Do not make this thing personal and do not attack me for being critical of, not even you or the law, but the way it is presented on the CIC page. And do not patronize me, I treat you with respect and expect the same from you.

Just answer this simple question - is the floating pass mark rule explained clearly on the main Canadian Immigration page? Is it fair for prospective applicants? Is it fair for overworked immigration officers? Is it fair for other people that experience long delays? Do you get my point?



Originally Posted by Andrew Miller
You obviously are one of those who are against paying for advice and for getting it for free only. It is of course your free choice to make. And you clearly indicated your bias against immigration consultants too.

Learn the basic rule - you only get what you pay for in this world. Like with any other law in every other country - there is the law, thare are all who must obey it and there are those who have knowledge, experience and approved credentials to help you with it. And yes - you pay for such help, just like you pay your car mechanic, plumber, golf or ski instructor, life coach, etc. . If you don't want to pay then you are on your own and must learn the law and it's interpretation by yourself and face consequences of not getting it right.

Get it?
bartM is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 12:55 pm
  #24  
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 8,984
Andrew Miller is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Any points update

No, it isn't. Section 77 is not clearly explained nor interpreted just like any other 364 sections of Regulations and 275 sections of IRPA. All of them are of less or more equal importance and why CIC should select just one to interpret it any further if you can read it yourself in Regulations?

As I said - CIC is already very generous by providing the mountains of info they do on their website. When I started in this business almost 15 years ago the law and regs were available only in the library and published in Canada Gazette - but interpretation, Immigration Manual, Operations Memoranda and departamental policies were rather classified and 99.99% of applicants had to rely on their own resourcefullness or hire professional to assist them in the process (just like I did almost 20 years ago when applying for landed immigrant status and as I did 7 years before that when moving to US from Europe). Applicants had no idea what selection criteria are, what is the pass mark nor that such thing even existed. All who didn't use professional assistance were applying absolutely blindly and were gambling with the process and their future. What CIC provides now was not even dreamed about back then.

And as always - more you get more you want. It is natural. CIC started more open policy about a decade ago and potential applicants have now all info that they need. It is up to them to follow links and to interpret rules - or to hire professional to assist them.

And yes, as I said it here countless number of times since law was introduced more than 2 years ago - floating pass mark being applied retroactively is not fair to applicants. But it is here for now. It may not be here tomorrow though (I certainly hope), but we need to play with cards we were already dealt with.


Originally Posted by bartM
Andrew, you misinterpreted what I wrote. I have no bias against immigration consultants or any lawyers or specialists in particular. I pay for advice whenever it is needed and I would definitely hire you if I had problems with immigration to Canada. Do not make this thing personal and do not attack me for being critical of, not even you or the law, but the way it is presented on the CIC page. And do not patronize me, I treat you with respect and expect the same from you.

Just answer this simple question - is the floating pass mark rule explained clearly on the main Canadian Immigration page? Is it fair for prospective applicants? Is it fair for overworked immigration officers? Is it fair for other people that experience long delays? Do you get my point?
Andrew Miller is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 3:07 pm
  #25  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 265
bartM will become famous soon enough
Default Re: Any points update

Originally Posted by Andrew Miller
No, it isn't. Section 77 is not clearly explained nor interpreted just like any other 364 sections of Regulations and 275 sections of IRPA. All of them are of less or more equal importance and why CIC should select just one to interpret it any further if you can read it yourself in Regulations?
I explained why several times already. Read my postings carefully.

As I said - CIC is already very generous by providing the mountains of info they do on their website. When I started in this business almost 15 years ago the law and regs were available only in the library and published in Canada Gazette - but interpretation, Immigration Manual, Operations Memoranda and departamental policies were rather classified and 99.99% of applicants had to rely on their own resourcefullness or hire professional to assist them in the process (just like I did almost 20 years ago when applying for landed immigrant status and as I did 7 years before that when moving to US from Europe). Applicants had no idea what selection criteria are, what is the pass mark nor that such thing even existed. All who didn't use professional assistance were applying absolutely blindly and were gambling with the process and their future. What CIC provides now was not even dreamed about back then.
The past is irrelevant in this thread. We're discussing the present situation.

And yes, as I said it here countless number of times since law was introduced more than 2 years ago - floating pass mark being applied retroactively is not fair to applicants. But it is here for now. It may not be here tomorrow though (I certainly hope), but we need to play with cards we were already dealt with.
Amen to that but it is not the rule itself we're discussing, just its presentation on the web.
bartM is offline  
Old Sep 15th 2004, 7:11 pm
  #26  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: London Ontario
Posts: 998
SANDRAPAUL is just really niceSANDRAPAUL is just really niceSANDRAPAUL is just really niceSANDRAPAUL is just really niceSANDRAPAUL is just really niceSANDRAPAUL is just really niceSANDRAPAUL is just really niceSANDRAPAUL is just really nice
Default Re: Any points update

All of these points are about the law and how to interpret it by the government when it comes to change/alter it. If the Government wants those in the system who have passed initial tests to fulfil the aim of entering Canada and making a useful addition to the society they will allow it. I have not read anywhere that the Canadian government is worried about too many people - quite the opposite - but they still I guess want some quality to the applicants. The pass mark acts as an intitial guide line as to whether or not the applicant(s) have sufficient ability and qualifications to be assessed on. When the law was changed I recall reading that there was a transitionary phase when those in the system could continue to be processed on the new points system. It depended on where you were in the system and what your dates were. It is unlikely that when and if the system does the reverse that it will be applied on a the date that the law is changed. There is likely to be a period of adjustment.

One point though. If the whole system is likely to change late 2005 would the experts agree that the system is likely to be left as it is until the time of complete change. The CIC officers then would not be burdened with too many changes, the system can allow those currently waiting a decision to be processed accordingly and then there would be less of an outcry late 2005 if the system then dissalowed large numbers.

Thus far no expert has explained to me how the CHC/CIC can check that all criteria are in place at the time of application and at VISA issue. It's not just the points. How about police certificates and accuracy (perhaps someone breaks the law), ability to support oneself with evidence of worth (maybe the applicant has spent all the money). There are so many factors that the officer will not be aware of so they have to base it on evidence at some point in time - AOR.

Last edited by SANDRAPAUL; Sep 15th 2004 at 7:20 pm.
SANDRAPAUL is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.